4063581669?profile=original

Hobby shop chain faces backlash for stance against ObamaCare

Support Hobby Lobby. Destroy the liberal boycott. Lets do a Chick-fil-A at Hobby Lobby. Spread the word. We need a Hobby Lobby day. Lets end this nonsense once and for all. Our power greatly exceeds their power, but we must exercise it. Go forth and BUY!

By Perry Chiaramonte

Published September 20, 2012

FoxNews.com

hobbylobby.jpg

National arts and crafts retail chain Hobby Lobby is facing backlash after filing a lawsuit opposing the HeathCare Mandate, with the owners claiming that it goes against their Christian Values. (AP)

A Christian-owned chain of hobby shops is facing a bitter backlash after suing the Obama administration over new requirements to provide insured employees with contraceptive and abortion coverage.

Oklahoma-based Hobby Lobby filed the suit Sept. 12 in U.S. District Court in Oklahoma City, alleging that the ObamaCare mandate violates the religious beliefs of the company's owners. The suit followed similar suits by Catholic colleges and a Denver-based company whose owners also objected to the mandate on religious grounds. While a judge has not yet ruled on Hobby Lobby's suit, a Facebook page calling for a boycott of the company, which operates 500 stores in 41 states, has appeared online, and several other forums have featured posts urging customers to steer clear of Hobby Lobby.

“I’m boycotting Hobby Lobby!” reads the heading of one posting on image posting site Flickr. “Even if you're pro-life this kind of action stinks to high heaven! If things like this can be allowed then what's next?!,” the user added.

“They’re being told they have two choices. Either follow their faith and pay the government half-a-billion dollars or give up their beliefs."

- Lori Windham, attorney for Hobby Lobby

Others have taken to social media to protest against Hobby Lobby, with a “Boycott Hobby Lobby” page on Facebook.

“I've been to two Hobby Lobby parking lots today and they were fairly empty. I used to have trouble finding a parking spot!” read one posting from the administrator of the Boycott page. “I think the boycott is catching on! I do not think they are getting the reaction they hoped for.”

Hobby Lobby owner David Green is a devout Baptist who owns one of the world's largest collections of Biblical artifacts. The Barret Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents Green in his suit, argued that compliance with the offending portion of the health care law that the nature of their suit is “would force religiously-motivated business owners like plaintiffs to violate their faith under the threats of millions of dollars in fines.”

Lawyers argued that company employees are well aware of Green's views and their bearing on the company.

“The Green family’s business practices ... reflect their Christian faith in unmistakable and concrete ways,” the complaint states. The company employs full-time chaplains; close all store locations on Sundays and monitors all marketing and operations to make sure that it is consistent with their beliefs.

Failure to comply with the mandate could subject the company to as much as $1.3 million in daily fines, according to Barret Fund attorneys.

"They’re being told they have two choices: Either follow their faith and pay the government half a billion dollars or give up their beliefs," Lori Windham, an attorney from theBarret Fund, told Foxnews.com. "We believe that’s a choice no one should have to make.”

David Green could not be reached for comment, but in a recent USA Today Op-Ed, he blasted the Obama administration for imposing mandates he believes he cannot comply with.

“Our government threatens to fine job creators in a bad economy," Green wrote. "Our government threatens to fine a company that’s raised wages four years running. Our government threatens to fine a family for running its business according to its beliefs. It’s not right.”

The company does not object to providing coverage that includes birth control pills, but refuses to provide or pay for two specific abortion-inducing drugs such as the so-called "morning after" pill, because Green's "most deeply held religious belief" is that life beginning at conception, the family said in a statement released through its attorneys.

As for the boycott, the company's founders believe customers have the right to vote with their feet.

"The Green family respects every individual's right to free speech and hopes that others will respect their rights also, including the right to live and do business according to their religious beliefs.," the statement said.

Hobby Lobby is believed to be the first non-Catholic company to file an objection to the healthcare mandate. The Newland family, the devoutly Catholic owners of Denver-based Hercules Industries filed a similar suit this past summer and won a court injunction that ruled that they are not obligated to follow the mandate.

“I think the law and precedent set by this case is very strong for Hobby Lobby and the Green Family,” Windham said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/20/growing-boycott-against-retail-chain-hobby-lobby-after-lawsuit-against-health/?test=latestnews#ixzz272eUxZ8N

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comments

  • Torm, I am not taking a stand against anything Chick-fil-A has without a doubt stood up for in the past. I feel they did right and fully supported their effort. I am just trying to reach the truth here and counter the pro-gay propaganda if at all possible.

    I was one of those who challenged the MassRisitance article and asked for clarification. Their answer to me and others is listed in my previous post. You can take from it what you wish.

    Maybe someone can post an answer from one of the Chick-fil-A exec's with a statement in answer to the gay lefts assertions. That would clear the issue up would it not? Right now all I am able to get is 'he said, they said' and a vague statement on their website. 

    I know without doubt the gay lobby are liars and I NEVER believe anything coming out of their vile mouths. But hiding what they say and do is just that...........hiding. That is why we are in the situation we are today in the fight against the gay agenda.

  • Torm and Ralph, I too am very much involved in the conservative movement even to the point of being a registered Conservative in New York when I voted for Barry Goldwater. But let me post the letter I just got from MassResistance in answer to my questions in regard to their previous claim:

    UPDATE: New information on the accusations that Chick-fil-A caved in  to the homosexual movement's demands.

    In our last email, dated Sept. 21, we excoriated Chick-fil-A and its CEO Dan  Cathy for allegedly caving in to the demands of the homosexual movement. Our  title was: Chick-fil-A caves in to homosexual pressure. Agrees not to donate  to pro-family groups in exchange for permission to put restaurant in Chicago.  Slap in the face to pro-family supporters.
                                    It appears that this is largely not true. We've published the truth below. But  finally finding that out wasn't easy.
                                    This is definitely one of the most exasperating news stories we've ever covered.  Getting to the facts has entailed wading through a lot of confusion generated by  the homosexual movement, the pro-family movement, and especially Chick-fil-A  itself.
    What was reported in the press
                                    Our email quoted from the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Washington Times,  Huffington Post, and a homosexual press release.
    They all basically reported the following: Chick-fil-A officials had told  Chicago Alderman Joe Monero in writing that the company would no longer donate  any money to "anti-gay," pro-family groups.
                                    Chick-fil-A also allegedly showed documentation that they had not recently given  money to such groups. The company supposedly also promised to make an internal  statement about non-discrimination on sexual orientation. In doing this,  Chick-fil-A reportedly had negotiated with Moreno and also a Chicago homosexual  activist group called "Civil Rights Agenda."
                                    In return, as Monero gleefully announced, he would not block Chick-fil-A's  efforts to open a restaurant in his trendy Chicago district. He termed this a  "great victory for the gay rights movement."
                                    Several newspapers contacted Chick-fil-A for their comments on this, but the  company refused to respond except to direct them to a statement on their website.
                                    Chick-fil-A's two main statements they've been giving out regarding this were:

    The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our  restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect -  regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will  continue this tradition in the over 1,600 Restaurants run by independent  Owner/Operators. Going forward, our  intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government  and political arena.
                                    And
    The WinShape Foundations [Chick-fil-A's non-profit arm] is  now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in  that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with  political agendas.

    These statements certainly lend credence to the charges as reported in the  last few days that the company was changing its policy of donating to pro-family  groups. And Chick-fil-A said nothing to the press to descredit that  interpretation.
                                    As a result, the story was reported everywhere that Chick-fil-A had caved in to  the demands of the homosexual movement. For example:

    New York Times: Chick-fil-A and Chicago Alderman Reach Agreement
    Washington Times: Chick-fil-A no longer will fund traditional-marriage groups
    Chicago Tribune: Moreno relents, will allow Chick-fil-A
    Los Angeles Times: Chick-fil-A vows to stop donating to anti-gay groups

    Thus in our recent email, we reported on what every news agency was saying,  along with what we could find on the Chick-fil-A website about it.
    More confusion from the pro-family movement
                                    Soon after publishing our article, we were inundated by over a hundred people  emailing us articles by CitizenLink.com (Focus on the Family) and WorldNetDaily, which deny the press reports about Chick-fil-A caving in.  Now, we are great admirers of CitizenLink and WorldNetDaily, but  in our opinion their articles only added to the confusion.

    The CitizenLink article, "Chick-fil-A Sets the Record Straight", has a lot of accusations, statements  of principle, and platitudes -- but sadly does not include any substantial  facts.
                                    The WorldNetDaily article, "Press suckered by Chick-fil-A fairy tale", mostly regurgitates  Chick-fil-A's press releases and corporate policy statements, which are not  particularly helpful as "evidence" one way or another. But it adds no  substantial facts.

    Neither of these articles is persuasive to an unbiased reader.
    And what's the truth? Did they really cave in?
                                    Friday afternoon we were finally successful in reaching someone in the  Chick-fil-A public relations department. Previously, we were only able to reach  people who were not knowledgeable of the situation, would not comment, or just  recorded messages. The public relations woman we talked to was fairly candid,  which was refreshing. We asked her direct questions, and she answered them.
                                    The main points of our conversation:

    1. She told us unequivocally that Chick-fil-A is going to continue to    donate to the same pro-family groups as before, even the ones that the    homosexual groups disapprove of. We specifically asked her if this    included Family Research Council, Exodus International, Eagle Forum,    and Focus on the Family. She said "Yes, it includes those."                                          
    2. But what about the public statements that Chick-fil-A was (1)    re-evaluating who they give to, and (2) would avoid the "gay marriage" arena    completely? She agreed that those statements were confusing but would not    elaborate further as to why they are being pushed.                                          
    3. Why did Chick-fil-A refuse to respond to questions by the press    about this, which would have cleared things up? She said that the company    often doesn't respond to the media because of the media's propensity to spin    things. (We suggested that in this case it was necessary.)                                             
    4. Did Chick-fil-A executives actually meet and negotiate with    Alderman Moreno and the homosexual group Civil Rights Agenda? She said she did    not know whether they did or not.                                      
    5. Did CEO Dan Cathy actually meet with college homosexual activists    to find "common ground" as has been widely      reported in the press? She said she did not know.

    We talked for quite a while and she reiterated those points. We asked the  obvious question: If Chick-fil-A is giving to the same pro-family groups as  before -- and this is the crux of the heated issue here -- why not say that  clearly on a prominent place on the web site, and tell it to the press, instead  of having them read a confusing and misleading policy statement? It would have  solved all the misunderstanding going around. She didn't have an answer to that.
                                    So apparently Chick-fil-A really isn't caving in. But who would have known?
    Did the liberal media malevolently spin this?
                                    The big theme among the conservative bloggers, including even Michelle Malkin is that the evil liberal media was using their usual tactics  to spin disinformation -- that Chick-fil-A is caving in to the homosexuals.
                                    We don't buy that. This time, we think the media did its due diligence. It was  Chick-fil-A that was being squirrely.
    Here's what we surmise actually happened: The Chick-fil-A executives met  with the Alderman and the homosexual group, and gave them their "official"  statements that imply -- though don't state specifically -- that Chick-fil-A is  changing its donations policy. They also gave them their 2011 Form 990, which  probably doesn't show any "troubling" donations. The Alderman and the  homosexuals accepted the reasonable meaning of the words, and probably  exaggerated a bit and claimed "victory" to the media. When asked by the press  for their side of the story, Chick-fil-A refused to talk and simply pointed to  the ambiguous and misleading "policy" statements.
                                    In something as charged as this, one should not have to search for a "public  relations" person to get the basic facts. Chick-fil-A should be straightforward  on the website -- unless they are trying to obscure something.
    Why you should be angry
    All this just exacerbates the horrible double standard going on.  Corporations across America openly brag about the millions of dollars they give  to fund the radical homosexual movement. Yet Chick-fil-A tries to dance around  and obfuscate the relatively tiny amounts it gives to groups fighting for the  truth (e.g., they gave just $1000 to Family Research Council). Why not just be  upfront and "proud" of doing good things?
    We tried our best to get the real story and report it to you accurately.  We think that Chick-fil-A's refusal to deny the allegations against it with a  clear statement of the facts, and to further make it difficult and confusing for  even its allies to get a straight story, produced the result they deserve:  misleading press reports across the country. And the sophomoric blather from the  conservative movement trying to defend them only added to the problem.
    You, our readers, are the ones who have also suffered by not getting the  facts you deserved. It's possible that this email is the most accurate article  out there on this incident!
    The larger problems still stand. You can't play down the middle on these  large culture-war issues. It just doesn't work. And if the reports are true that  Mr. Cathy and other company executives are meeting with radical GLBT groups,  that should be of concern to pro-family people. You can't "negotiate" with the  LGBT radicals for "common ground." There is no common ground with these people.  They are out to radically change society. They certainly don't ever look for  common ground with us.
    Finally, unless there is an incredibly compelling reason, this is the  last Chick-fil-A article that MassResistance will be doing. We've had it. We  tried to do the right thing and got a lot of abuse for it. Let somebody else  have the aggravation of figuring them out.

  • I recently sent a link in regard to the position of Chick-fil-A in answer to a posting on this site. Here is the message I was sent today by MassResistance and their take on the issue after contacting Chick-fil-A themselves:

    UPDATE: New information on the accusations that Chick-fil-A caved in  to the homosexual movement's demands.

    In our last email, dated Sept. 21, we excoriated Chick-fil-A and its CEO Dan  Cathy for allegedly caving in to the demands of the homosexual movement. Our  title was: Chick-fil-A caves in to homosexual pressure. Agrees not to donate  to pro-family groups in exchange for permission to put restaurant in Chicago.  Slap in the face to pro-family supporters.
                                    It appears that this is largely not true. We've published the truth below. But  finally finding that out wasn't easy.
                                    This is definitely one of the most exasperating news stories we've ever covered.  Getting to the facts has entailed wading through a lot of confusion generated by  the homosexual movement, the pro-family movement, and especially Chick-fil-A  itself.
    What was reported in the press
                                    Our email quoted from the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Washington Times,  Huffington Post, and a homosexual press release.
    They all basically reported the following: Chick-fil-A officials had told  Chicago Alderman Joe Monero in writing that the company would no longer donate  any money to "anti-gay," pro-family groups.
                                    Chick-fil-A also allegedly showed documentation that they had not recently given  money to such groups. The company supposedly also promised to make an internal  statement about non-discrimination on sexual orientation. In doing this,  Chick-fil-A reportedly had negotiated with Moreno and also a Chicago homosexual  activist group called "Civil Rights Agenda."
                                    In return, as Monero gleefully announced, he would not block Chick-fil-A's  efforts to open a restaurant in his trendy Chicago district. He termed this a  "great victory for the gay rights movement."
                                    Several newspapers contacted Chick-fil-A for their comments on this, but the  company refused to respond except to direct them to a statement on their website.
                                    Chick-fil-A's two main statements they've been giving out regarding this were:

    The Chick-fil-A culture and service tradition in our  restaurants is to treat every person with honor, dignity and respect -  regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender. We will  continue this tradition in the over 1,600 Restaurants run by independent  Owner/Operators. Going forward, our  intent is to leave the policy debate over same-sex marriage to the government  and political arena.
                                    And
    The WinShape Foundations [Chick-fil-A's non-profit arm] is  now taking a much closer look at the organizations it considers helping, and in  that process will remain true to its stated philosophy of not supporting organizations with  political agendas.

    These statements certainly lend credence to the charges as reported in the  last few days that the company was changing its policy of donating to pro-family  groups. And Chick-fil-A said nothing to the press to descredit that  interpretation.
                                    As a result, the story was reported everywhere that Chick-fil-A had caved in to  the demands of the homosexual movement. For example:

    New York Times: Chick-fil-A and Chicago Alderman Reach Agreement
    Washington Times: Chick-fil-A no longer will fund traditional-marriage groups
    Chicago Tribune: Moreno relents, will allow Chick-fil-A
    Los Angeles Times: Chick-fil-A vows to stop donating to anti-gay groups

    Thus in our recent email, we reported on what every news agency was saying,  along with what we could find on the Chick-fil-A website about it.
    More confusion from the pro-family movement
                                    Soon after publishing our article, we were inundated by over a hundred people  emailing us articles by CitizenLink.com (Focus on the Family) and WorldNetDaily, which deny the press reports about Chick-fil-A caving in.  Now, we are great admirers of CitizenLink and WorldNetDaily, but  in our opinion their articles only added to the confusion.

    The CitizenLink article, "Chick-fil-A Sets the Record Straight", has a lot of accusations, statements  of principle, and platitudes -- but sadly does not include any substantial  facts.
                                    The WorldNetDaily article, "Press suckered by Chick-fil-A fairy tale", mostly regurgitates  Chick-fil-A's press releases and corporate policy statements, which are not  particularly helpful as "evidence" one way or another. But it adds no  substantial facts.

    Neither of these articles is persuasive to an unbiased reader.
    And what's the truth? Did they really cave in?
                                    Friday afternoon we were finally successful in reaching someone in the  Chick-fil-A public relations department. Previously, we were only able to reach  people who were not knowledgeable of the situation, would not comment, or just  recorded messages. The public relations woman we talked to was fairly candid,  which was refreshing. We asked her direct questions, and she answered them.
                                    The main points of our conversation:

    1. She told us unequivocally that Chick-fil-A is going to continue to    donate to the same pro-family groups as before, even the ones that the    homosexual groups disapprove of. We specifically asked her if this    included Family Research Council, Exodus International, Eagle Forum,    and Focus on the Family. She said "Yes, it includes those."                                          
    2. But what about the public statements that Chick-fil-A was (1)    re-evaluating who they give to, and (2) would avoid the "gay marriage" arena    completely? She agreed that those statements were confusing but would not    elaborate further as to why they are being pushed.                                          
    3. Why did Chick-fil-A refuse to respond to questions by the press    about this, which would have cleared things up? She said that the company    often doesn't respond to the media because of the media's propensity to spin    things. (We suggested that in this case it was necessary.)                                             
    4. Did Chick-fil-A executives actually meet and negotiate with    Alderman Moreno and the homosexual group Civil Rights Agenda? She said she did    not know whether they did or not.                                      
    5. Did CEO Dan Cathy actually meet with college homosexual activists    to find "common ground" as has been widely      reported in the press? She said she did not know.

    We talked for quite a while and she reiterated those points. We asked the  obvious question: If Chick-fil-A is giving to the same pro-family groups as  before -- and this is the crux of the heated issue here -- why not say that  clearly on a prominent place on the web site, and tell it to the press, instead  of having them read a confusing and misleading policy statement? It would have  solved all the misunderstanding going around. She didn't have an answer to that.
                                    So apparently Chick-fil-A really isn't caving in. But who would have known?
    Did the liberal media malevolently spin this?
                                    The big theme among the conservative bloggers, including even Michelle Malkin is that the evil liberal media was using their usual tactics  to spin disinformation -- that Chick-fil-A is caving in to the homosexuals.
                                    We don't buy that. This time, we think the media did its due diligence. It was  Chick-fil-A that was being squirrely.
    Here's what we surmise actually happened: The Chick-fil-A executives met  with the Alderman and the homosexual group, and gave them their "official"  statements that imply -- though don't state specifically -- that Chick-fil-A is  changing its donations policy. They also gave them their 2011 Form 990, which  probably doesn't show any "troubling" donations. The Alderman and the  homosexuals accepted the reasonable meaning of the words, and probably  exaggerated a bit and claimed "victory" to the media. When asked by the press  for their side of the story, Chick-fil-A refused to talk and simply pointed to  the ambiguous and misleading "policy" statements.
                                    In something as charged as this, one should not have to search for a "public  relations" person to get the basic facts. Chick-fil-A should be straightforward  on the website -- unless they are trying to obscure something.
    Why you should be angry
    All this just exacerbates the horrible double standard going on.  Corporations across America openly brag about the millions of dollars they give  to fund the radical homosexual movement. Yet Chick-fil-A tries to dance around  and obfuscate the relatively tiny amounts it gives to groups fighting for the  truth (e.g., they gave just $1000 to Family Research Council). Why not just be  upfront and "proud" of doing good things?
    We tried our best to get the real story and report it to you accurately.  We think that Chick-fil-A's refusal to deny the allegations against it with a  clear statement of the facts, and to further make it difficult and confusing for  even its allies to get a straight story, produced the result they deserve:  misleading press reports across the country. And the sophomoric blather from the  conservative movement trying to defend them only added to the problem.
    You, our readers, are the ones who have also suffered by not getting the  facts you deserved. It's possible that this email is the most accurate article  out there on this incident!
    The larger problems still stand. You can't play down the middle on these  large culture-war issues. It just doesn't work. And if the reports are true that  Mr. Cathy and other company executives are meeting with radical GLBT groups,  that should be of concern to pro-family people. You can't "negotiate" with the  LGBT radicals for "common ground." There is no common ground with these people.  They are out to radically change society. They certainly don't ever look for  common ground with us.
    Finally, unless there is an incredibly compelling reason, this is the  last Chick-fil-A article that MassResistance will be doing. We've had it. We  tried to do the right thing and got a lot of abuse for it. Let somebody else  have the aggravation of figuring them out.

  • I'm with you , Linda. Ms.Fluked and any other young lady can be responsible for their own birth control. She affords to go to Georgetown which is a very expensive school. She and her boyfriend also afforded a trip to Paris. I will continue to frequent Hobby Lobby because they stand by their religious beliefs and maintain moral values.

  • Don't be sad Lois Ann.  This is our time to stand up and shine.  They have not won.  They will not win as long as I and others like me draw breath.  I took an oath to defend my country from all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC and you better believe myself and many others like me will do just that.  Keep up the good fight.  Never never never give up!  Freedom will prevail. 

  • I am so sad, it seems the demo are winning.  They are just taking over everything, and destroying the whole country.

  • Torm, it seems Mass Resistance disagrees with you in that they claim Chick-fil-A did fold. God, I truly hope they are wrong and Chick stood tall.

  • Well I think the Demo's are turning this country into a communist country, frankly. They are taking everything away.

  • I will most certainly be at HL on Oct 1st. The leftist agenda has to be stopped and that will not happen if we sit back and do nothing. We have a right to free speech, and the right to worship as we so please. If you don't stand up for your faith you will soon no longer be able to practice your faith. I say HoRah for the Greens. Stay the course and receive your reward. I can not believe that the United States government is trampling on the Constitution in this way. The founding fathers must be turning over in their grave. Bible believeing Christians across this great country need to wake up and start taking a long hard look at what is going on. Remember the saying, they came for one group and I said nothing, they came for another group and I said nothing, then they came for me. Well folks they are coming, and not in full sight. It's back door SLOW tactics!!!! In Jesus' name please wake up. Our very existence  as a free nation is at stake.

  • Thank you Torm Howse for setting the record straight.   The left just will not quit.  When they lose, they just make up more lies to salvage their already fragile egos.  We must remain united.  Always keep in mind, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, acts like a duck, it is a duck!  The enemy will not cease it's barrage of propaganda; it will only get worse.  If something is said that sounds like propaganda, it is propaganda!

This reply was deleted.